 Good evening and welcome to the town of Wilson development review board tonight is Tuesday, June 26 2018 We have two items on the agenda for tonight The first order of business is As tradition has it the public forum. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to bring? An issue fourth in the public forum segment of tonight's meeting I'm hearing none. We will proceed directly into the first application DP 17-29 Northern Holdings Inc. Requests a discretionary permit For their five lot residential subdivision if the applicant would please come to the table and When you're settled in state your name and address please for the record Dennis Borkle Your address, please address address 4657 lower Newton Road, Swanton, Vermont. Thank you Eric Lovie 1811 P. Lock's Point Road, North Hero, Vermont George McCain with McCain Consulting 93 South Main Street in Waterbury, Vermont Good evening gentlemen Staff goes next Request for discretionary permit review for a five lot subdivision located on the southeast corner sunset Hill Road and Old Creamery Road ARZD The subject parcels 12.48 years the proposed project would create five lots Three lots would be for single-family homes and Lot four would be for duplex and Lot five is the proposed 9.77 as you may recall this project came before the DRB for two pre applications Originally it was reviewed as DP 17-16 in February 2007 and at that time the DRB did not recommend that the project be 2017 17 yes, it was DP 17-16 and it was reviewed in February of 2017 And at that time the DRB didn't recommend the project move forward to growth management allocation because there were Concerns about the nature and extent of wetlands and seasonal flooding on property DRB reviewed the proposal a second time as DP 17-29 on July 25th of 2017 at that time the applicant provided additional information about the elevations of the homes and updated wetland information that was confirmed by the with site visit by the state of Vermont wetlands scientist At that time the DRB did recommend that the project proceed to growth management allocation So on March 27th of 2018 the DRB approved four units of residential growth management allocation for this development And the parcel is allowed one additional unit by right The I'll just go over the pre application recommendations and how the applicant has addressed those recommendations So the first recommendation was to request four units of residential growth management allocation at the growth management Hearing in March which the applicant did and received four units of allocation at that hearing Number two Because this is a parcel of land 10.5 acres or greater Projects required to set aside a minimum of 75 percent of the area of the parent parcel is permanently protected open space The 9.77 acres of proposed open space exceeds the minimum 75 percent requirement Three have a debt disturbance assessment must be submitted and the applicant has submitted the HDA number four was Four five and six and seven were all recommendations Put forth by the Conservation Commission number four states The western most building envelope off Sunset Hill Road, which is lot in lot one Should be cited so as to minimize impacts to the wildlife travel corridor To further reduce impacts the house on lot one should be The building envelope has been shifted to avoid impacts to the degree possible Understanding that there there are constraints with elevations and so I think the applicant Did try to avoid impacts The house on lot one remains the south of the driveway At this time I I don't think the conservation Commission has concerns about the house being to the south or the north of the driveway What are you basing that statement on They they basically well they didn't ask them they didn't ask them to shift it back to the to the North of the driveway they you know They seem to accept the site plan and accept that there were constraints on the site that Number five Stated to maintain the existing hedgerows around the open meadows And along the road to the degree possible to provide wildlife habitat And the applicants complied as indicated on the site And Six all wetland buffers shall be permanently marked on the ground as well as on the final plans the applicant has the wetland buffers on the site plan and Have indicated that they should they need to be marked on the ground. That's in the HLA decorations as well and Seven the applicants should indicate on the site plan how stormwater impacts will be will be mitigated The applicant has submitted an erosion prevention and sediment control plan and In the HOA declarations there is a statement that stormwater mitigation measures shall be maintained And finally eight All comments are actually not quite eight all comments made by the Department of Public Works stated in their memo dated June 28th 2017 Shall also be adopted as pre-application recommendations and the proposal complies with DPW requirements And lastly nine all comments made made by the Williston fire department Shall also be adopted as pre-application recommendations Although it is not indicated in their application materials It is my understanding that the applicant is cooperating with the fire department to install Some type of water storage system and dry hydrant on the property so As far as the use goes the proposed subdivision Will be for the purpose of adding four new dwelling units to the parcel in addition to the one unit allowed By right single and two-family dwelling units are in allowed use in the ARZD Three of the dwellings will be single family and the remaining two are proposed in a duplex configuration The applicants proposing a subdivision which will result in five dwelling units on 12.4 acres of land where the maximum allowed residential density in the zone is one dwelling unit per 8,000 square feet or approximately 1.84 acres The Bylaw requires that lands with wetlands wetland buffers and slopes in excess of 30 percent Be subtracted from the density calculation And that lands with slopes between 15 percent and 29.9 percent be calculated at a reduced density of One dwelling unit per ten acres We have made an assessment of these constraints and Have determined the subject parcel is constrained as follows and I'm included a table that show the acreage of wetlands and buffers steep slopes and Unconstrained lands There's a total of ten point one point ten point one nine acres of unconstrained lands Which allows for five point five four Allowable dwelling units and then rounding down as required the total The maximum number of dwellings allowed on the parcel is five The applicant has proposed five units on the parcel As a subdivision of land 10.5 acres 10.5 acres or greater the projects were acquired by the Bylaw to set aside a minimum of 75 percent of the area of the parent parcel as permanently protected open space The open space must include steep slopes Wetland areas and and buffers and any other resources required to be protected under chapter 27 the applicants shown proposed nine point seven seven acres of open space and The open space includes all the wetlands and associated buffers as well as the steep slopes the proposed mechanism of protection is via designation and Stated in the homeowners association declarations For landscaping and setbacks the As stated in chapter 31 the minimum property line setbacks in the ARZD are 50 feet from the Road town highway right of way for the front setback for the side and rear setbacks 15 feet the applicant site plan Has shown the building envelopes comply with the required setbacks The bylaw chapter 23 has fairly loose requirements for Landscaping in the ARZD around residential developments in the ARZD Says that they that you know buffers have to be should be ample but doesn't specify minimum widths and In the ARZD landscape buffers typically consist of open space a rather existing vegetation in the open space But there's considerable discretion the DRB has considerable discretion in determining what Chapter 31 also provides some guidance regarding minimum distances between clusters of home sites Namely that clusters must be effectively separated from neighboring properties public ways and each other by open space and The widths of buffers between clusters Can vary with the terrain and the presence of screening vegetation But that the DRB can recommend anywhere from 100 to 500 feet of Buffers, so I guess there there is I Guess it's questionable whether you can consider these clusters. There's one house on Sunset Hill Road, and then there's you know, two on A cluster of two on old Creamery Road and then another duplex, so I'm I'm considering those clusters of homes Anyway, so it seems as if the existing vegetation provides Generally provides ample buffers the only thing that's a little bit questionable in my mind is the distance between the house on Sunset Hill Road the lot on Sunset Hill Road and the lot on Immediately Jason to it on old Creamery Road. It seems like that is might be a little bit sparse So you might want to add a condition about Supplementing the landscape buffer between those two home sites. I did not include a condition to that effect I Seem to recall that that's an area that's pretty wet Proposed home sites and so it would have to be A type of vegetation that would Stand Some pretty significant water if I remember when we were looking at it when this application first came forth to us So given that you would still recommend some type of vegetation. I I Think that that's really up to you Woods and weeping willows will deal with water Yeah, I think since these are both Going to be new homes that won't be it seems like if this if one of those was already I would agree with that. Okay, okay The Applicant has proposed planning street trees along the public way on all four lots and that what they proposed is in performance appears to be in performance with The bylaw chapter 26 For access the applicants proposed to share driveways Serving two units each on old Creamery Road and a single driveway serving the remaining unit on Sunset Hill Road The Wilson development bylaw encourages the use of shared driveways where feasible The applicant will need to obtain an access permit for each driveway from the Wilson Department of Public Works and the driveways will need to meet Chapter 13 Including perpendicular alignment grade site distance and clearance from existing driveways and intersections The DRB didn't request a traffic study at pre-application review Staff notes that in Williston three single family units and two multifamily units would produce four point five hour trip ends Permits for new single-family homes will have to be accompanied by impact fees including traffic impact fees For growth management Proposed development did receive the four units of residential growth management allocation on March 27th, 2018 The allocations valid for five years beginning on July 1st 2018 So Other boards Did review the proposal? The police department had no comments The fire department commented Relative scarcity of water for firefighting in this part of town and requested that water supply for firefighting and Public works noted that right right away permits are required the culvert saw culvert size and locations need approval by DPW and As well as noting the regular compliance with their standards Related to utilities and driveways The public works and fire comments memos fire department comments memos are attached to the staff report The Williston Conservation Commission also reviewed the project and their findings are attached The Conservation Commission recommended that The recommendations of the HDA be followed to minimize impacts to wildlife habitat basically To prohibit free roaming pets and limit the size of fenced areas Restrict tree cutting to the building envelopes and as necessary to install infrastructure Cluster development as close to existing roadways as possible You shared infrastructure like driveways water sewer whenever possible limit the amount of lighting Limit the amount and type of lighting used immediately restore disturbed areas using conservation seed mix and mulch to avoid spreading invasive species And then the other recommendations just about maintaining existing hedgerows to the degree possible Wetland buffers being permanently marked on the ground as well as on the final plans and Maintaining Stormwater mitigation as indicated on the erosion prevention Staff is recommending that the DRB approve this request for discretionary five lot residential development Conclusions and conditions of approval for your consideration Thank you. It's Your turn if you have anything to add That is a very good job summarizing most of what's going on there The big thing I will say the cooperation of the fire department. We actually do have the signed agreement with the fire department that we've just gotten Excuse me. Just got in pink cariff. So we are actively cooperating with the fire department there We're looking at utilizing the existing wet pond that's on site in the form of a dry hydrant to provide the fire protection flows the only thing that's pending on that is having the Tina Heath the state weapons biologist come back out to Change in the wetland buffer Other than that the plan remains largely unchanged proposed during the preliminary permit and the growth management piece We just brought some additional detail on how we're going to be taking care of Additional things like water wastewater, etc. We've got one shared leech field That's going to be a community system for all five units There will be one easement across that open space for lot one to get over there The houses are very close to that septic easement area. That would be the problem We are trying to utilize shared driveways where possible So we've got the shared driveways for lots one and two as well as for the duplex unit and the curb cuts and details that we've provided on the site plans are meeting all of the Williston Public work standards as far as the radius of the curves the grading the paved apron along both Sunset Hill Road and Old Creamy Road Close as the lead how close is the leech field to the The the area where the water can really run in that That that trough in there. It's quite a ways away action the main channel This is our each field here the main channel runs way down here. Okay When the water we've got it up at a very nice grade above there, so that we're not concerned with flooding issues Just curious. Oh, the other question was is how many wells are you sinking on that piece of property? We are proposing four so there would be a shared well for the duplex And then one for each individual lots We're wells on ten acres, okay So the two that you're showing across the street on either side of non-pill road. Yes Those are existing wells we've dictated their isolation protection areas So we've kept our leech field outside of that well head of protection area for those wells So that we're not infringing on any anyone's water protections with the new system I Assume you've read all 13 can propose conditions of approval Any concerns with any of the 13 Nothing that jumped right out. No, I think Before I ask the board for for more questions. Do you have anything else to add at this point? Questions from the board This common leech field is there going to be some kind of legal Contract between all the owners in case the field for any reason dies There is yes in the declaration of covenants and homeowner association agreement. There's stipulations for Get the exact term and when I shared infrastructure There's outlines on whether it's if it's shared by multiple units Everyone pays a piece if it's your own say your own individual septic tank Even though it feeds to the common leech field, you've got to repair your own tank and the replacement lines are called for in the plan replacement lines are going to be installed Right off when we build the system Okay, so you're doing it like the floor heating in the bathrooms where you have the secondary wiring set. Okay, exactly Is are the replacement lines shown on this plan? They are they're actually interfingered with the primary trenches. So if you look at I think I think I'm seeing that Yes, that's what I thought I would see We'll have two trenches of the four active to start with I Each field is if you give them two years an active you can switch it back They work just again. Yeah, they eat themselves up, but it's brand new in a couple years Yeah, I'm a little confused on the tree line designation here Here to have it drawn at two different the line of two different scales and they cross each other Makes it confusing. Yes Poor turkey. We've got the existing tree line is the smaller layer piece. Okay, the darker bolt is the proposed tree line But we're trying to pick there was that the existing vegetation would remain once we got to the edge of the property lines But the open space as the existing vegetation were being Yeah, I mean tree line is a little loose based on this little picture I see here though. I assume this is in the winter when there's no leaves in the trees Yeah, but it's so it makes it very difficult to see Where the trees actually are Yeah, tree line a little loose in some spots here So you're so is there any clear delineation of where you're cutting trees on here? Are you're saying that within the building the building lots you're going to be? cutting the trees That area because you don't want any woody growth vegetation on top of the leech field it can reach down and crack the pipe, so we're There we're going to be cutting what's necessary for construction and then for maintaining the leech field itself and then within the Property lines will be basically within the building envelopes and property line to facilitate Adding some fill to protect and raise some of the buildings up Instructions is there so the HDA has recommended that you restrict the tree cutting to the building envelopes And as necessary to install infrastructure and yet I I heard you say that this line along the the lot lines is Indicating that you're going to be cutting everything up to that and beyond that you're going to leave the existing So it's a little confusing as to where you're cutting and clearing the land and you know Which then leads into my next question, which is how do you propose complying with the the the HDA recommendations here? Our proposal with the compliance of the HDA recommendations was basically everything on the open space as existing vegetation We could potentially bring that Tree line cutting back out to the edge of the building envelope The only place it really differs are on the side and real property lines setbacks, which is only 15 feet Anyhow, so that we didn't think it was the issue with Limiting the tree clearing is that we are dealing with steep slopes and we will need to fill a Lot of the area to get more gradual slopes And if we leave the the trees Within the building a lot We would end up putting dirt over the roots and they would die in the future And I'd rather remove them and we are proposing to plant new Streak trees to recreate the buffer because right now there's a lot of scrub trees there That aren't gonna ever really look like much. I understand what you're saying. I'm still trying to figure out how that's in I'm here. You say one thing, but it's in it's actually Contrary to what I'm reading here where it says restrict tree cutting to the building envelopes and is necessary to install infrastructure And you're saying you're gonna you're gonna cut those and because you have to Yeah, I mean the braid back in and on three sides the building envelope is basically the building lot On the rear and side. It's a 15 foot difference On the front those are gonna be necessary to clear in order to get driveways in and Okay, so I'm not a house. So we've got some I'm looking a lot to for example You know there you've got the existing tree line is and goes right into the proposed side of the proposed house Probably 80 or 90 by 80 feet back from the from the road So there's quite an area there that's that's kind of a difference between the if you if you just limited to the building envelope or if you When you you'd be cutting 50 feet between the road If I'm reading this right the trees go right up to the road there Yes, they do and that's where we've got our landscaping plan. We're posing a replant in that They were providing the street trees on the frontier by that screening Over power lines that are running through them But we're replacing those with Chapter we've got the species and size and quantities on there with these plans that we are looking at tonight are the exact plans that were reviewed by the HDA Yeah, I think we brought those along to the Make sure they were clear on what you were cutting because it does that that tree line and what not hasn't changed in the Year, so we've been looking at bringing this one to the board What about the other conditions there? Which I'm I'm as much interested in this as anything else But to prohibit free roaming pets and limit the size of fenced areas. So they're my law Covenants there that they're going to do that or I I Have to reread them, but I do know that there was Something regarding the pets. Yeah, I believe that was in the declaration of covenants. I'm just trying to find the exact verbiage as well I do recall seeing it And while you're doing that, I mean the other question would be about the the amount and type of lighting use are there restrictions there? It's the lighting we've shown on the next sheet over with lighting plan I guess it's on the same landscape So we're going to have Lighting it up the garage Front door and rear man door And to when is there anything to prevent homeowners from installing lots more lights after they move in Not other than they would be in non-conformance with the permit and therefore have to install Yeah, but but look at that bullet Okay, this is this is just a really loose statement limit the amount and type of lighting used I don't know how you limit a type Or you just you just don't use the same fixture over and over again I think what type what we typically interpret that is the the downcast and shielded So you're not getting a floodlight or a raised vertical light up to a flagpole your type of light is downcast That's in interpretation I do agree with you Pete that the HGA needs to be a little more specific when they write these for us to So so from my perspective and I've made this statement before When I when I chaired meetings that bullet as far as I'm concerned where we're going to strike because because it doesn't say anything that could be Interpreted by a reasonable man I don't know what that means So same with bullet number one to what extent are we limiting the size of fenced areas? Right So those those I can tell you that it's very likely those two bullets are gonna be struck in our in our final Finding yeah, unless they outrule us Well, we're on that section, I guess number three number three does say all wetland buffers So we permanently marked on the ground. Do you have thoughts on how of that? Yeah, there's two common ways that we accomplish that one option is Say installing boulders or distinctive landscaping features like a landscaping mound along that edge of that buffer Another is a distinctive tree planting Sugar maple or some kind of tree that wasn't necessarily common to the site But if we planted those at 50 to 75 foot spacings or as needed to depict the boundary Those are all common ways that we've used to depict those kind of boundaries in the past The mound seems less preferable because it would it would restrict water from flowing in this case It wouldn't probably work out that there was a different project. We had that one That was more of a residential project where it was a common open mode area So it was a clear mound so the lawnmower couldn't get up over it to mow behind the mound They had to keep on this side to keep from on On this side, it would probably be boulders or trees With that yeah eight-foot chain like you can pick you can pick up the the ones that they dislike not to use You just put those in there So what have we used in the past? I mean doesn't have to say This is a wetland or is a boulder or trees Boulders and trees are typical Delineating features there's a sign or anything that goes along with it. Yeah, that's it sometimes like Yes, they do and they need to be painted Anything else John? No Okay Okay, can you point out where the dry hydrant it you said there's currently one out here that would be used No, we're currently working with the fire department to get one installed. So it's gonna there's a This class three button here is actually a pond so where it's going to be installed to that's You may know The fire department to come in right now and just pop a hose in there and suck it dry Use it for fire flows, but there's the concern when there's it's iced over or inaccessible The head that dry had to come out and that's part of the reason Outside Wetlands program would like to see that hydrant and where also where the fire department is there to see it so get everybody on site to Have their say and hash it out to see the best location Yeah, I I met with them last week with the fire department They wanted it or the site they were looking at again to be confirmed by the wetlands specialist is There's disarmament drive here Going this way and so they want to put it right here either put some kind of old or some kind of trees or something to Show where the hydrant is itself The standard is they actually put a sign saying fired part no parking dry hydrant, right? They just put one in over in Shelburne the same thing Yeah, the the driveway across almost right across the downhill road is that that's an existing Yeah, it's actually it's a field access so it's like an old farm road probably part of an old quarry operation That would just remain as is. Yeah, we probably use that as a construction entrance for the leach field But it's not not provided for any permanent access to the site in the future and then the I guess this is the EPSC sheet the Russian prevention sheet I know sorry the landscape sheet does show that there's the cross hatched areas that show that are labeled as Existing trees of vegetation to remain, but it's only shown in the one corner and around the leach field But that's not the intent right here the intent is to maintain It is yeah We kind of put those in the vicinity of where the other cutting is going on so that it was clear what the intent to maintain was during construction And then the there the open space would remain as existing vegetation So it could have kind of imagined of being all cross hatched you put it outside of the building up elopes and Exactly and slow and where you've got your slope your fill lines Okay So so just just for my clarification so on a on the building lot your you're not going to maintain or try to save the kind of the scrub brush along the road When and and then because what you're doing is you're clearing that out building the house And then you're putting in the the new trees as delineated in the landscape plan. Is that is that a fair representation? Yeah, I I was kind of saying that for everybody Yeah Rather rather than putting in rocks put in holly bushes There you can't When you know if they do if they do start to impact on like your leach building that they're not a big deal to dig up and put A new one, you know a young one back in its place But that would be easier for for the mowers to come in and say Everything just everything north of the holly bushes what we're cutting I Anything else David? I guess just I think we'll need to modify condition number 13 which says all comments made by the fire department will be Adopted as a condition of approval the fire department memo actually says you've got several options And so we want to be more specific presumably right and so the idea There are no there's no tank or sister and going in you're gonna be I think we'll want to be a little bit more specific there that In response to the fire department's comments 13 should say is the fire department will have the final say of what it's supposed to be and As long as they're happy then we're happy We're not gonna say the fire department has Final say because there's been some precedent where the fire department was asking for something that wasn't required by code and so we're not gonna provide that much of That much of a room that much of a room But but you're on track with that the spirit of this is that is that you reach an agreement with the fire department on how their concerns are going to be addressed and planning before issuance of a final building permit has to sign off from the fire department That's what the spirit of that is and you're heading in that direction This is a develop the water supply for real fire protection landowner agreement signed by both the landowner and the fire department Yeah, if you'd like to see it. Yeah, so that's really that's really where this is going and and so you're on track with that Matt you good you good with that. Okay. Oh, it's worded. I guess is yeah Anything else David Courtney Paul anything else John Okay Well, thank you You've done a very thorough job on this appreciate it and We're gonna close DP 17 dash 29. Oh, are there any comments from the audience? Good answer then On that note, we're gonna we're gonna close DP 17 dash 29 at 750 Thank you very much. Okay Next up is DP 17 dash zero one Black Rock construction request a discretionary permit to construct Northridge 40 unit subdivision I'm going to recuse myself as is David because we are Southridge residents and I think I hand the gavel over to you John wherever you want your chair so As always we're gonna let staff go first. Sure You might want to get the applicants name and address. Thank you Benjamin Avery with Black Rock construction 68 Randall Street, South Burlington Okay So just to orient the remainder of the board as to where we are This is a Request to submit a portion of the final plans for the Northridge subdivision This is not a public hearing item. This is on your agenda as other business When the Northridge discretionary permit was approved by the DRB the DRB retained as staff advised the Final say over the signing of final plans in the case of subdivisions of land Our council has also always Stringently recommended that final plans and especially plots be signed by the DRB chair Acting chair tonight was Pete Kelly who's recused himself your normal chair Scott Riley's not in The in attendance tonight So our procedure with this is to inform the board members who are remaining which is a non quorum Number of the board you need for for form. You've got three sitting right now of what the request is obtain your advice communicate that back to the chair who's not here tonight And suggest that he follow your recommendation to us So though that's our procedural note for tonight. We're not in a public hearing. We're in the signing final plans This is an unusual request and then it's not a complete set of final plans It's a partial element of the final plans that's intended to achieve a very Specified goal as it relates to the progress of this development and I'll get into that in a moment Board members who were in attendance at our last DRB meeting two weeks ago know that we initially reviewed this request at that meeting and That one of the things the sitting members at the time asked for was for the town's council to weigh in on the recommended action moving forward So we've gotten that input and I've attached it to what I've handed out in the form of an email correspondence with between black rocks attorney and Joe foul on the town attorney about the Partial approval of the final plan here So what's this request all about this request is about a boundary line adjustment between a lot containing a single family home and A piece of the Northridge parcel that will eventually become part of the road that goes from Metcalf Drive into Northridge the lot we're talking about with the house on it currently has a driveway that runs parallel to that boundary line down to Metcalf Drive and moving the boundary to Make the lot that the road will go on big enough to put a road on per town standards We'll put that driveway too close to its side yards set back in other words We're moving the line closer to the driveway. It makes the driveway non conforming The remedy for that is to rotate the driveway 90 degrees and have that house access the new street that's proposed to be constructed The challenge of doing that immediately Is that the streets not there yet? Because it has not been constructed and can't be constructed until the boundary line gets moved So there's a timing element here where for some period of time Doing this causes a non conformity One remedy Discussed by staff in the memo and at our last meeting is Just file all of the final plans for the for the entire project as approved under discretionary permit Obviously, that's a that's a significant effort It takes a significant amount of time and it's not something applicants usually do until if they're subject to it until they've cleared other permitting processes like state Act 250 in this case staff's proposal and what was discussed and reviewed by the town council is That the DRB consider signing the plat for the boundary line adjustment to allow that that neighboring property with the relocated or To be relocated driveway to be sold off This is essentially taking that one little element of the project looking at it the way we would look at it At a boundary line adjustment if this came in all by itself and there was no Northridge and there was no road Staff would be able to approve this or rather the zoning administrator would be able to approve this in the office Administratively because it's connected to this larger project. We're proceeding with this greater degree of caution and Treating it like it's a piece of the final plans for the Northridge subdivision because it is so that proposal remains and what we've updated you with in this case is the correspondence between Black Rock's attorney the applicants attorney and our attorney who says something to the effect of It's not in especially impenetrable Legal lease as long as you satisfy the DRB. I do not think the select board cares about the driveway construction issue and I would I would echo that you know that We're the one sort of Picking the zoning compliance issue apart with a with a needle or fine-tooth comb There is an involvement of the select board here related to who owns that right to develop that road and transferring that back And forth select board doesn't want to own it until it's constructed and completed So there's a there's a property transfer Involved in this that's in that's in their court essentially Actually that the property has been transferred and the deed has been recorded. So we're now the Deed it owner of both 749 Metcalfe and the open space right-of-way lot. So the Boundary line adjustment is between two parcels owned by the same entity One question I was curious is when you sell this property because I'm assuming you're gonna sell this house to somebody Which is why this is being asked to yeah These poor folks moved in several months ago and they would love to close on their house. Okay, so the question is When they get their deed there's going to be a note saying at some point in time Your driveway is going to turn 90 degrees at some point. You're going to connect to a new road, you know And they signed all that so they can't turn around and suddenly throw this all back into the mix You know and suddenly you know sue your organization my point that is correct. That's all done. That's in their deed That's all done and that's that deed was reviewed by the town attorney as well So in other words, this is we're back to really this is enough why I'd us because of the fact that you said this Would have all been done right without us really even being involved other than to say oh by the way that this happened That's correct. Okay In the end is there a time frame in which you've promised to build out even if Northridge does not proceed We had discussed with staff a term of two years We felt that was ample time to move our project forward Even if we were to meet an obstacle and it were to take some time We've also agreed that if the project does not move forward in that two-year period that we will at our expense Shift the driveway to the it'd be the West However many feet we need to in order to bring the driveway into compliance. So That was was something we discussed with staff so that we weren't asking Anybody to to give us sort of an indeterminate amount of time for for non-conformity. So we thought that was very fair Yeah And that language is in the the language it's been Everything has been covered in the closing with the and buyer's attorney has reviewed it. The lender has reviewed it So I guess what would be useful for staff at this point It's it's not really a voting item nor can you really vote on anything because you're not a quorum of the board, but From each of the three of you in attendance on this do you have any advice for the staff should we request that the DRB chair Come in and sign the plat to allow this boundary line adjustment to go forward. That would be my recommendation. Thank you Thank you very much Yes So you have to close it. I think my only question is is If the chair were to agree then it would it would be tomorrow I only ask cuz folks are trying to close on sure the chair is not in attendance tonight because he was out of town But is available. I'll have to find out when he's gonna be back in town Okay, but what we typically do on signature on final plans items like this is inform the chair Yes, you know, we've we've got the head nod to have you come in and sign it and then we'll Once it gets signed we walk it over to the clerk's office for recording. Excellent. So we'll keep you apprised of that. Thank you very much We'll be a see you on the rest of this place We're done and approved I would imagine we'll be in for final plan barring Obstacles that act 250 Probably with any luck in the fourth quarter, okay, cool. So that would be we have most of our sub permits in Working through it. Thanks Okay Thank you. We're gonna go into deliberative session now at 803 Welcome back to the town of Williston Development and Review Board of Tuesday, June 26 2018 We are coming out of deliberative session at 835 Do I have a motion for DP 17-29 northern holdings as Authorized by WDB six point six point three I David Saladino move that the Wilson Development Review Board having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials Including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the Wilson Development by-law And having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of June 26 2018 Except the findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval proposed by staff for the review of DP 17-29 And approved this discretionary permit for a five lot residential subdivision with the following modifications Condition of approval number 11 is modified to include at the end of the sentence as revised by the Development Review Board below and then reproducing the Conservation Commission's recommendations with the following modifications striking bullet 1a cd and e modifying bullet 1b to State restrict tree cutting to the building lots within limits of disturbance as noted on EPS erosion prevention seven sediment control plan Maintaining bullet 1f and maintaining items 2 3 and 4 from the recommendations And then modifying condition number 13 to strike the word adopted and replace it with the word addressed and To add a condition number 14 which states erosion prevention and sediment control plan shall be revised to include defined limits of disturbance Adjacent to the proposed sewer force main running from lot 1 to the proposed leach failed This approval authorizes the applicant to submit final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for future development Which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based? Thank You David. Is there a second? Paul seconds it any further discussion All in favor aye opposed hearing none motion carries Is there a motion to approve the minutes of June 12? 2018 I like to move to make a motion that we approve the minutes of June 12 2018 as written is there a second Courtney seconds it any further discussion I'm pretty sure I was absent. So I think just Noting that I was not attendance. I can't remember our discussion about our card. Yes. Yeah Is John are you do you accept that friendly amendment? I do Exactly Courtney your second still stands Any other further discussion all those in favor to approve the minutes as amended? I any opposed Hearing none motion carries Do I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? at At 837 just before the before seconding Is there some staffing news to report? Sure. Oh